Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

nme.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 410 posts

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#201

Post by InitialLastName »

explodingcamera wrote: post #166
tzs wrote: post #71

Is anyone working on a reasonably priced turntable to play vinyl discs without degrading them? In the mid '80s, Finial Technology announced such a turntable, and had a working unit at CES in 1986. It had a stylus that contained laser interferometers that could very accurately and precisely measure the distance from the stylus to the grove walls. It kept the stylus near, but not touching, the groove, getting the audio…

This seems kind of counterproductive for the (I think) vinyl target group. If I listen to vinyl, I want the kinda retro feeling "real" analog audio signal, else I'd just get a CD or online download. A mid-range stylus is completly sufficient for a great experience without any noticable noise and next to no real wear on the records.

> "real" analog

Best oxymoron I've seen in a while ("analog" literally means "simulating something else")

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#202

Post by klingonopera »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #47
klingonopera wrote: post #44

A CD, and a FLAC-rip for me, please. I'd pick it over vinyl or any digital stream any day.

If you really just want a FLAC rip of a CD to play over a media center, then consider simply downloading the FLAC rip from a filesharing community, but then buying the vinyl release for the sake of owning the physical artifact. That way, you both get high-quality digital audio and you financially support the artist, but the vinyl release has larger artwork and is more satisfying as a collector item.

I buy the music, because I want to support the artists.

I buy the CD-format, because in theory, I can do that anonymously (cash at the store). I don't buy the vinyl, because I explicitly want the digital format (see my reply to another comment on this thread as to why).

I rip the CD, because, well, my phone doesn't have a CD-drive (wow, that would be weird...).

At this point... I'd actually throw away the CD, because I hate having stuff. I don't care about showing off my collection to anyone, nor do I care about collectibles, but having stuff is just... cumbersome. But alas, I don't throw away the CD, somewhat because of sentimentality and also because if you have a physical copy of digital data, that's not a bad thing to keep, just in case, so ok, it stays.

Considering a vinyl is analog and also more cumbersome, I think it's pretty clear why I prefer the CD.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#203

Post by avip »

fragsworth wrote: post #190
mruts wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is using a laser not real analog audio?

Since "real" was in quotes, I assume they're talking about the change to sound quality that is caused by the physical touching of the devices. It's not necessarily more clear or better, it's just different, and that's the point of doing something so retro. But if you aren't actually doing that thing, it loses a lot of the psychological value. It's similar in some sense to the reasons why people go to see live concert…

Maybe true for rock concerts. Definitely false for classic or jazz live performances.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#204

Post by mtts »

parsimo2010 wrote: post #151

CDs are dying, but they are mostly being killed by streaming services, not by vinyl. Digital music formats are still the king by far. The vast majority of people don't even care that their streamed music is lossy and they lose out on high frequencies that their ears can't hear and their headphones can't reproduce. Vinyl appeals to hipsters and dumb audiophiles (there are smart audiophiles, but they aren't buying viny…

I only buy vinyl because, funnily enough, it lasts. CDs scratch and become unlistenable. I’ve also had multiple name brand players crap out on me. Record players are much more reliable - and much easier to fix.

Also, in my favorite genre - electronic music - artists no longer put out CDs. So I pretty much don’t have a choice.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#205

Post by mrob »

iamnotacrook wrote: post #181
efdee wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends what the digital recording is mastered for, really.

I dunno about that...I've recorded some of my acoustic guitar playing, and some electronic pieces. Some mastering exists which would make the recordings sound better than a 100% unaltered digital playback?

If you're playing in a noisy environment like a car then some dynamic range compression will make it sound better.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#206

Post by benologist »

Aaronmacaron wrote: post #160
parsimo2010 wrote: post #151

CDs are dying, but they are mostly being killed by streaming services, not by vinyl. Digital music formats are still the king by far. The vast majority of people don't even care that their streamed music is lossy and they lose out on high frequencies that their ears can't hear and their headphones can't reproduce. Vinyl appeals to hipsters and dumb audiophiles (there are smart audiophiles, but they aren't buying viny…

Your conception of vinyl buyers is very negative. I think there's another category of people that buy vinyl. If you really love an album and want to support the artist you can purchase the vinyl version of the album. Apart from supporting the artist you often get additional treats like a nice booklet with the lyrics or additional art/imagery. I really think there's extra value in buying vinyl apart from it being hip.

There's extra value and there's nostalgia and a shared-ness. But the question is, who's still going to buy them when there's a huge carbon tax proportionate to having a quarter-gigabyte of data on ten ounces of plastic shipped across the planet... that's when a lot of people will realize they haven't bought a record in years but still listen to music every day imho.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#207

Post by stormbrew »

core-questions wrote: post #161
pmlnr wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need a computer of some sort to decode that, whereas vinyl _is_ engraved vibrations.

Stands to reason it wouldn't have been impossible to make an analogue medium using similar technologies. Imagine the refraction angle varying continuously and some wide-range pickup that converts to electricity. _why_, of course, is a different question

Laserdisc was an analog implementation of that technology. Eventually it also carried digital audio a la CD but the video and the original audio encoding were analog.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#208

Post by dredmorbius »

avip wrote: post #203
fragsworth wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since "real" was in quotes, I assume they're talking about the change to sound quality that is caused by the physical touching of the devices. It's not necessarily more clear or better, it's just different, and that's the point of doing something so retro. But if you aren't actually doing that thing, it loses a lot of the psychological value. It's similar in some sense to the reasons why people go to see live concert…

Maybe true for rock concerts. Definitely false for classic or jazz live performances.

Which part is false? "Feels more real" or "sound quality isn't better"?

I suspect you mean the latter, though with modern audio tech, well-mic'd and mastered recordings can easily sound ... if not better, then more intense, than live performances.

Though there's nothing like seeing the music being performed live.

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#209

Post by 0xcde4c3db »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #153
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vinyl groove is about 25-100 micrometer, and feature sizes on it go down to about 22.5 micrometer [1]. Lasers are extremely cheap today compared to what they were back in the day, and doing laser interferometry to detect features this small is not that difficult. I imagine a hobbyist with the right skill set could hack together a reader for a few hundred bucks at most. [1] http://www.gzvinyl.com/About-vinyl.aspx

Yep, modern optical computer nice have sensors north of 10000 dpi, so ostensibly a hacked up mouse/scanner could read all the data with plenty of room for error. A colleague was doing this in a decade ago, I wonder if he ever got it working.

I'm not sure I can find the specific project I'm thinking of now (possibly [1]), but I recall that ~10-15 years ago someone scanned vinyl records with a consumer or "small business" grade scanner well enough that the scan could be played back with enough fidelity to be recognizable. Certainly far short of "all the data", but it's a data point for what can be accomplished with mass-market hardware.

[1] https://www.cse.huji.ac.il/~springer/DigitalNeedle/index.htm...

Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986

#210

Post by madengr »

aibara wrote: post #183
mytailorisrich wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to buy a physical medium then CDs are the obvious option because objectively they are superior to vinyls in every aspects and they can also come with nice booklets. I think that the hip-value of vinyls is extremely important. I write that as someone who had no choice but use vinyls and tapes until I got a CD player...

CDs are just... awful. Nice booklets? You mean small booklets with tiny pictures and even tinier text. And they come in what I consider one of the most horrible containers of all time: the ugly and easily-broken jewel case. Like vinyl, CDs can be scratched, but they sure don't degrade gracefully: the nice pops of vinyl becomes jarring skips on a CD up to the point where the CD just becomes unplayable. Nowadays I have…

I was a teenager in the mid 80’s, mostly with tapes, but with some vinyl. The first CD I heard (1987) was far superior sound quality. Vinyl has nice cover art, but that’s it. I’ll stick with CDs. Eventually those will become hip.
Post reply on HN